Lady Justice holds ancient symbols while wearing a blindfold. This representation of the U.S. criminal justice system conveys fair and equal treatment under the law for all. This fair and equal treatment is not intended to apply solely to the courtroom; it applies to every facet of the criminal justice system, including law enforcement’s response to crime scenes. The crime scene is the starting point of investigations, with the work performed at these scenes affecting the subsequent investigations and case outcomes. Crime scene investigators (CSIs) have the enormous task of piecing together items of evidence left behind at the scenes.¹ These specialized investigators have only one opportunity to process a crime scene properly.² This one opportunity involves the identification, collection, documentation, and preservation of physical and biological evidence.

Having only one opportunity to properly process a crime scene and complete these critical tasks requires CSIs to be properly educated, trained, and equipped. Possessing the knowledge required to perform the duties of the position, being trained in performing these duties, and having the proper tools to complete scene-processing tasks are equally critical. Those working as CSIs must also have the knowledge and ability to communicate the scientific practices performed at crime scenes in a court of law. It is not enough to simply perform tasks associated with identifying and collecting evidence—one must also explain to officers, juries, and judges the scientifically accepted practices common to crime scene work.

Science and Evidence Admissibility 

Advancements in the forensic science field over the past four decades have revolutionized crime scene investigative processes. These advancements require CSIs to be highly educated and trained to process crime scenes effectively. Forensic science involves the application of science to law, also described as the body of scientific processes applied to matters of the courts.³ The processes performed by CSIs involve some degree of scientific application. This requires courts to accept general evidence-collection procedures for use in court proceedings.⁴ For nearly 70 years, the Frye standard guided evidence admissibility in U.S. courtrooms; however, concerns about the standard’s ability to accommodate new scientific practices led to the adoption of the Daubert standard. This standard is the result of the 1993 case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and was derived from the landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that asserted the Frye standard was not the absolute prerequisite for the admissibility of scientific evidence as it applies to Federal Rules of Evidence.⁵

Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence advocates that trial judges assume the position of gatekeepers and determine evidence admissibility and reliability in their courts.⁶ The U.S. Supreme Court, through the Daubert decision, provided guidelines to help judges gauge the veracity of scientific evidence presented before the courts.⁷ Scientific techniques used in crime scene processing for identification and collection of evidence must meet general acceptance rules. Along with general acceptance, scientific methodologies must be peer-reviewed, there must be standards for the methods, and the methods must be validated and testable.⁸ These rules of evidence are in place to ensure the admissibility of scientific evidence. The scientific evidence is derived from practices used in the field by CSIs, and CSIs must have the knowledge and skill sets to collect this evidence.

The Costs Associated with Mediocrity

Unfortunately, there are many law enforcement agencies currently using personnel, either sworn or civilian, who lack the education and specialized training to effectively perform the duties of a CSI, yet still fulfill this role. This is unfortunate, as the success of some criminal cases may be based on the evidence collected following the commission of crimes. It is no secret that clearance rates for crimes in the United States have been dismal for many years. Of all crimes committed, the crime of homicide is usually considered the most serious of crimes. As the most serious crime known to society, it would not be unreasonable to expect homicides to be solved or cleared at a high rate. Today, homicide is the most cleared crime across the United States. However, only about half of all homicides are cleared. This rate is compared to nearly 71 percent of homicide cases in 1980.⁹ What is most alarming about this information is that all other crimes are solved at much lower rates. In 2022, clearance rates for the crime of rape were 26.1 percent, and other crimes have even lower rates of clearance, such as  robbery 23.2 percent, larceny-theft at 12.4 percent, and burglary at 13 percent.¹⁰

With scientific breakthroughs over the past four decades forging a path to an increased ability to identify and secure evidence associated with crime, why are clearance rates for homicides decreasing, and why are other crimes cleared at such dismal rates? In providing a better understanding of clearance rates, it is important to explain that clearance rates consist of crimes solved through arrest and those cleared by exceptional means. The term exceptional means refers to crimes being cleared due to the death of the offender, a lack of cooperation by victims, or the denial of extradition of the offender. Regardless of the reason for an exceptional means clearance designation, all categories of exceptional means must include the following:

• • The offender must be identified.
  • Evidence must be present to support an arrest, charge the offender, and turn the offender over to the courts for prosecution.
  • The offender’s location must be identified so that he can be taken into custody.
  • Circumstances outside of the control of law enforcement must exist that prohibits the arrest, charging, and prosecution of the offender.¹¹

In meeting these criteria, the identification of the offender through the collection of evidence is the most important factor involved in bringing offenders to justice and affecting clearance rates in a positive way. In fact, this evidence collection process is the foundation for all investigative activities following the crime scene response. Failed investigations that allow offenders to remain free and potentially victimize additional innocent people, while original victims fail to receive justice, negatively impact law enforcement agencies and communities.

Many law enforcement agencies have had their reputations tarnished due to failed investigations. These investigations have often involved the inability to secure the evidence needed to properly reconstruct the crime and identify perpetrators, the contamination of crime scenes by those working the scenes, or the improper handling and preservation of the evidence. Many unsolved homicides can be attributed to a lack of physical evidence to move forward with the cases. Many of these unsolved cases are decades old and will likely never be solved.

Minimum Standards and the CSI Position 

The ability to identify perpetrators of crimes depends on the ability to secure the evidence that identifies or relates to those involved. This securing of evidence depends on the ability of the CSIs to identify, collect, document, and preserve the evidence. This ability comes with proper education and specialized training. It is also critical that law enforcement agencies have standards and minimum requirements for filling CSI positions. Across the United States, local agencies are requesting the services of state-run forensic labs for serious crime scenes like homicides. This is of course an acceptable practice, as these state-run labs and their CSI personnel usually have the education, training, and tools to properly conduct investigations. However, for most crimes outside of homicide, law enforcement agencies rely on their own personnel to provide these services to their respective communities. Unfortunately, many of these law enforcement agencies do not have personnel with the proper qualifications to process crime scenes.

Victims of crimes call their law enforcement agencies to report crimes. Officers respond and often call their crime scene units to assist at the scenes. CSI personnel then arrive with marked vehicles and persons wearing agency uniforms, which gives crime victims a sense of professionalism. What the crime victims are unaware of is that the personnel assigned to process their crime scenes may not be legitimately qualified to do so. Many agencies use law enforcement personnel or civilian personnel with little to no formal education or specialized training to properly perform the duties of the position. This can create terrible injustices that affect crime victims, law enforcement agencies, communities, and the criminal justice system as a whole.

Hiring policies for CSI positions differ across law enforcement agencies. Some agencies do not have formal crime scene units, and use detectives, deputies, police officers, and property and evidence custodians to respond to and process crime scenes. Dispatching such personnel to conduct CSI work is acceptable if the personnel are properly educated and trained. But, in many cases, these personnel are simply not qualified. With the collection of physical evidence so important in solving crimes and the nearly constant development of new forensic practices for crime scene processing, it becomes more and more unacceptable that law enforcement agencies use non-qualified personnel to provide the initial, and arguably the most important service to crime victims—the crime scene investigation.

What the Research Reveals 

A 2022 research study sought the views of 26 CSIs from 17 different law enforcement agencies in the state of Florida. The research study involved a qualitative, phenomenological approach to answering questions about the importance of a college education and specialized training in performing CSI work, and the need for organizational policies for minimum requirements for CSI personnel.¹³

The results of the study revealed that 73 percent of the CSIs participating in the study had college degrees. The same percentage (73 percent) advised that college degrees in forensic science and crime scene investigations were important.¹⁴ These CSIs understood the need for a college education and coursework designed to provide the educational foundation for CSI work. Coursework specific to the field consists of the following topics:

• • forensic science
  • medicolegal investigation of death
  • crime scene investigations
  • biology
  • legal aspects of criminal justice
  • ethical issues in criminal justice
  • technology in criminal justice

College programs focused on crime scene investigations, forensic science, and biology were all programs completed by the CSIs involved in the study. In addition, 88 percent of participants agreed that the public viewed CSI education and specialized training as important. This factor would play a key role in the courtroom, as jurors become involved in criminal trials and observe the backgrounds and knowledge of CSIs providing testimony. Of the study participants, 92 percent viewed specialized training for CSIs as important, and 96 percent of participants revealed that specialized training was important. It was determined that 77 percent of study participants believed there should be minimum requirements for law enforcement agencies to fill CSI positions, while 100 percent viewed ongoing education and training as important in keeping CSIs up to date in forensic practices.¹⁵Finally, 88 percent of study participants revealed that specific personal attributes of CSIs were important in performing the duties of the CSI. These attributes consisted of being detail-oriented; having strong communication, organizational, and time management skills; and possessing the ability to prioritize work.¹⁶ It is not enough for CSIs to have adequate education and specialized training to perform the position’s duties. They also need the personal attributes that allow them to effectively and efficiently perform the duties of the CSI at high levels of quality and accuracy.

Ethics, Duty, and Responsibility 

In conclusion, every law enforcement agency has a duty and obligation to serve its community with the highest caliber of personnel. Agencies have an ethical responsibility to ensure justice is delivered to  crime victims and those responsible for their victimization. The implementation and adherence to minimum education and experience policies for CSIs are critical to not only individual agencies, but also the criminal justice system. Agencies currently adhering to such policies should be commended. They understand that CSI work in the 21st century requires a greater focus on science and knowledge. Law enforcement agencies serving their communities while failing to recognize the importance of science and knowledge and whose programs lack qualified CSI personnel are providing a terrible injustice. 🛡

Notes:

¹Joshua Reynolds et al., “Investigator Beliefs of Homicide Crime Scene Characteristics,” Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice 15, no. 1 (2019): 60–85.

²Bilgehan Arslan and Seref Sagiroglu, “Fingerprint Forensics in Crime Scene: A Computer Science Approach,” International Journal of Information Security Science 8, no. 4 (2019): 88–113.

³Sonja Bitzer, Pierre Margot, and Olivier Delémont, “Is Forensic Science Worth It?” Policing Journal of Policy & Practice 13, no. 1 (March 2019): 12–20.

⁴Stuart James, Jon Nordby, and Suzanne Bell, Forensics Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative Techniques, 4th ed. (CRC Press, 2014), 25–28.

⁵Richard Saferstein, Forensic Science: From the Crime Scene to the Crime Lab (Pearson Education, 2013), 21.

⁶ 28 USC App Fed R Evid Rule 702: Testimony by Experts.

⁷Saferstein, Forensic Science. 

⁸Suzanne Bell, Forensic Science: An Introduction To Scientific and Investigative Techniques, 5th ed.(CRC Press, 2019), 19.

⁹Lee Brown, “US Murderers Stand a 50% Chance of Getting Away with It, New Report Finds,” New York Post, February 28, 2023.

¹⁰Statista, “Clearance Rate – Crime Clearance Rate U.S. 2022, by Type.”

¹¹Federal Bureau of Investigation, “2017 Crime in the United States.”

¹²Anthony Bertino and Patricia Bertino, Forensic Science: Fundamentals & Investigations (Cengage Learning Company, 2020), 26.

¹³Richard English, Is Education and Training the Answer? A Qualitative Study among Crime Scene Investigation Practitioners in the State of Florida (doctoral diss. Saint Leo University, 2022), 13.

¹⁴English, Is Education and Training the Answer? 101.

¹⁵English, Is Education and Training the Answer? 101.

¹⁶English, Is Education and Training the Answer? 101, 127–128.

Please cite as

Richard English, “Who Is Processing Your Crime Scenes? Law Enforcement’s Missed Opportunity,” Police Chief Online, November 8, 2023.